If Defendant Shows Plausible Defense Under Order 37 CPC, Court Must Grant Leave Unconditionally Without Requiring Any Security: J&K High Court
1 month, 1 week ago

If Defendant Shows Plausible Defense Under Order 37 CPC, Court Must Grant Leave Unconditionally Without Requiring Any Security: J&K High Court

Live Law  

Setting aside a trial court's order that had imposed a bank guarantee condition on a defendant seeking leave to defend, the Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court reaffirmed the principle that if a defendant discloses facts that may establish a defence at trial under Order 37 CPC, leave to defend must be granted unconditionally, without requiring security or a payment into court. if the defendant discloses such facts as may be deemed sufficient to entitle him to defend which leads to the inference that at the trial of the action the defendant may be able to establish a defence to the plaintiff's claim, the plaintiff is not entitled to judgement and the defendant is entitled to leave to defend, but in such a case the Court may in its discretion impose condition as to the time or mode of trial but not as to the payment into Court or furnishing security” These observations came in a dispute that originated from a suit filed by one Mohammad Shafi Bhat against Bilal Ahmad Bhat under Order 37 of the Code of Civil Procedure for the recovery of ₹11 crores along with 18% interest. Applying these principles, Justice Wani held that the trial court's observation that the defense was "plausible but improbable" was itself sufficient to entitle the defendant to unconditional leave. In light of these conclusions the High Court set aside the portion of the trial court's order that required the defendant to furnish a bank guarantee, granting him unconditional leave to defend.

Defense Trial Court Order Cpc Leave Plaintiff Defendant Order 37 Defend Unconditional Unconditional Leave  jk  high  defendant  court  shows  leave  requiring  plaintiff  unconditionally  trial  order  guarantee  plausible  security  defense  defend  unconditional

History of this topic

[Summary Suit] Dismissing Application For Leave To Defend In Suit For Non-Prosecution Is Unsustainable In Law: J&K High Court
3 weeks, 5 days ago

[Summary Suit] Dismissing Application For Leave To Defend In Suit For Non-Prosecution Is Unsustainable In Law: J&K High Court

Live Law  

The Jammu and Kashmir High Court has held that if a trial court does not consider an application for leave to defend a suit filed by the defendant on merits, the impugned judgment and decree become unsustainable in law. A bench of Justice Sanjay Dhar set aside the decree and judgment passed by the trial court and remanded the matter …

S.92 CPC | Leave Of Court Mandatory Prerequisite For Instituting Suit, Defect Cannot Be Cured Later: J&K High Court
2 months, 3 weeks ago

S.92 CPC | Leave Of Court Mandatory Prerequisite For Instituting Suit, Defect Cannot Be Cured Later: J&K High Court

Live Law  

Reinforcing the mandatory nature of Section 92 of the Civil Procedure Code the Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court has stated that the leave of the court is a condition precedent for instituting a suit under this section. A bench of Justice Javed Iqbal Wani emphasized that a suit instituted without such prior leave is void ab initio, and …

High Court Rejects Conditional Leave to Defend for Summary Suits
5 months ago

High Court Rejects Conditional Leave to Defend for Summary Suits

Live Law  

The Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court has reiterated that under Order 37 Rule III of the Civil Procedure Code (CPC), courts retain the discretion to impose conditions on a defendant seeking leave to defend a summary suit. The court emphasized that this discretion is exercised based on the specific facts and circumstances of each case, and upon compliance …

O.37 R.3 CPC | Defendant Not Obliged To Apply For Leave To Defend Without Service of Summons: J&K High Court
8 months ago

O.37 R.3 CPC | Defendant Not Obliged To Apply For Leave To Defend Without Service of Summons: J&K High Court

Live Law  

Quashing an ex parte judgment passed by the 4th Additional District Judge, Srinagar, in a case where the defendant was not served with a summons for judgment the Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court has ruled that a defendant is only obligated to apply for leave to defend a suit after being served with a summons for judgment. Clarifying …

Discover Related